'Bloody Monday at Kansas City Star'

From above: The word is there have been very heated arguments in the newsroom involving Managing Editor Steve Shirk over who which journalists will be let go and which ones will be retained.

Meaning between the M.E. and the executive editor, who is the former sports editor?

 

somebody posted something a while ago that really stuck with me ...

"If you keep removing toppings from a pizza ... remove the sauce ... remove the cheese ... remove the pepperoni ... eventually it's not pizza anymore"

 

I think the Star has already cut as much as it can without turning that section into something worse than ordinary. So I imagine it's going to change from an award-winning nationally recognized section into a pile of shit.

There's a long-term problem in place. So McClatchy thinks of a short-term solution: destroy our product by cutting staff, and hope our readers don't notice.

I have a hunch it's not going to work. I just wonder how the executives think this is going to end.

 

Shaggy, the executives know this is a bad, self-destructive idea. But all that matters is making the nut on debt service. McClatchy is just trying to pay the shark the vigorish. And like most debtors, they aren't thinking past tomorrow.

 

Seriously, everybody knows how this is going to end. Newspaper corporations are just trying to suck every penny possible out of the product before it goes kaput, then they'll cut their newspapers loose.

I half think most of these companies -- especially the ones that own other holdings besides newspapers -- are TRYING to kill their newspapers, force even the still-profitable ones to lose money, so they can justify closing them.

 

Some Guy might be on to something here.

 

CNHI, JRC ... do ya think?

 

I love Mike Fanin, who built that great sports department. Be interesting to see how sports fares, considering his roots. I'm sure he's not sleeping tonight.

 

Wasn't it like 25, maybe 30, years ago that about 90% of newspapers, even the big ones, were privately owned, real reporting was taking place, and profit margins were in the 5-10% range.

Too bad all these huge conglomerates couldn't just sell back all their print products to indovidual or family ownerships and put this world back on its axis. All this debt service stuff is crap----if you can't buy a property with half-cash and half stock, then you shouldn't be doing it, period.

Maybe our industry should wear one big mask with A I G written in big letters across the top, and fool Obama and Pelosi into giving us---not the boards or CEOs---$175 billion to pay off all those multitudes of sins, and let's get back to work, folks.

 

No offense, but I'm sure he slept well. He's not getting fired and as an exec at a big newspaper like that he's probably pulling down 300,000 or more.

 

I'm sure he is making plenty of $$$$, but he wouldn't be making that kind of money without a substantial bonus and stock options. In the old days ---- like 2000 ---- an editor at that kind of paper might have made $220,000 salary plus a $50,000 bonus plus stock options. Obviously, no one is making money from bonuses or stock options these days.

 

That's a little unfair.
I don't know Mike Fanin, but from what I've heard and read about him, he's in this business for the right reasons. And nobody who wants to do good journalism wants to lay off a third of their newsroom, no matter how much they're getting paid.